-
Frontiers in Medicine 2023Patients often experience shivering after spinal anesthesia. In recent years, more and more studies have compared the efficacy and side effects of intravenous... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patients often experience shivering after spinal anesthesia. In recent years, more and more studies have compared the efficacy and side effects of intravenous butorphanol and tramadol in the treatment of shivering after spinal anesthesia. Therefore, we conducted a MATE analysis and systematic review to compare the efficacy and side effects of butorphanol vs. tramadol in the treatment of shivering after spinal anesthesia.
METHODS
PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from inception to 30 December 2022, comparing the effects of butorphanol vs. tramadol for the control of shivering after spinal anesthesia. Data assessment and collection were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.4 software.
RESULTS
Five randomized controlled trials involving 302 adult patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that butorphanol has a shorter time to cease shivering (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) [-0.89, -0.17], = 0.004, = 0%), a higher rate of cessation of shivering within 1 min after administering the study drugs (relative risk (RR), 1.69; 95% CI [1.15,2.48], = 0.008, = 0%), and higher incidences of sedation (RR, 2.98; 95% CI [2.11, 4.21], <0.00001, = 0%), compared with tramadol.
CONCLUSION
In the treatment of shivering after spinal anesthesia, butorphanol has a shorter onset time and a higher rate of cessation of shivering within 1 min after the study drugs were administered than tramadol. Therefore, butorphanol is superior to tramadol in the treatment of shivering after spinal anesthesia.
PubMed: 38116041
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1271664 -
BMC Anesthesiology Nov 2023The latest clinical trials have reported conflicting outcomes regarding the effectiveness of xenon anesthesia in preventing postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction;... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The latest clinical trials have reported conflicting outcomes regarding the effectiveness of xenon anesthesia in preventing postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction; thus, this study assessed the existing evidence. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from inception to April 9, 2023, for randomized controlled trials of xenon anesthesia in postoperative patients. We included English-language randomized controlled studies of adult patients undergoing surgery with xenon anesthesia that compared its effects to those of other anesthetics. Duplicate studies, pediatric studies, and ongoing clinical trials were excluded. Nine studies with 754 participants were identified. A forest plot revealed that the incidence of postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction did not differ between the xenon anesthesia and control groups (P = 0.43). Additionally, xenon anesthesia significantly shortened the emergence time for time to opening eyes (P < 0.001), time to extubation (P < 0.001), time to react on demand (P = 0.01), and time to time and spatial orientation (P = 0.04). However, the Aldrete score significantly increased with xenon anesthesia (P = 0.005). Postoperative complications did not differ between the anesthesia groups. Egger's test for bias showed no small-study effect, and a trim-and-fill analysis showed no apparent publication bias. In conclusion, xenon anesthesia probably did not affect the occurrence of postoperative neurocognitive dysfunction. However, xenon anesthesia may effectively shorten the emergence time of certain parameters without adverse effects.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Child; Xenon; Postoperative Period; Anesthetics; Anesthesia, Inhalation; Delirium
PubMed: 37946114
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02316-5 -
BMC Anesthesiology Jul 2023Evidence-based effect of anesthetic regimens on postoperative delirium (POD) incidence after hip fracture surgery is still debated. Randomized trials have reported... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Neuraxial versus general anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery and the incidence of postoperative delirium: a systematic review and stratified meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Evidence-based effect of anesthetic regimens on postoperative delirium (POD) incidence after hip fracture surgery is still debated. Randomized trials have reported inconsistent contradictory results largely attributed to small sample size, use of outdated drugs and techniques, and inconsistent definitions of adverse outcomes. The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to investigate the impact of different anesthesia regimens on POD, cognitive impairment, and associated complications including mortality, duration of hospital stay, and rehabilitation capacity.
METHODS
We identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2000 to December 2021, in English and non-English language, comparing the effect of neuraxial anesthesia (NA) versus general anesthesia (GA) in elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery, from PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library database. They were included if POD incidence, cognitive impairment, mortality, duration of hospital stay, or rehabilitation capacity were reported as at least one of the outcomes. Study protocols, case reports, audits, editorials, commentaries, conference reports, and abstracts were excluded. Two investigators (KYC and TXY) independently screened studies for inclusion and performed data extraction. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool. The quality of the evidence for each outcome according to the GRADE working group criteria. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to assess the pooled data.
RESULTS
A total of 10 RCTs with 3968 patients were included in the present analysis. No significant differences were found in the incidence of POD comparing NA vs GA [OR 1.10, 95% CI (0.89 to 1.37)], with or without including patients with a pre-existing condition of dementia or delirium, POD incidence from postoperative day 2-7 [OR 0.31, 95% CI (0.06 to -1.63)], in mini-mental state examination (MMSE) score [OR 0.07, 95% CI (-0.22 to 0.36)], or other neuropsychological test results. NA appeared to have a shorter duration of hospital stay, especially in patients without pre-existing dementia or delirium, however the observed effect did not reach statistical significance [OR -0.23, 95% CI (-0.46 to 0.01)]. There was no difference in other outcomes, including postoperative pain control, discharge to same preadmission residence [OR 1.05, 95% CI (0.85 to 1.31)], in-hospital mortality [OR 1.98, 95% CI (0.20 to 19.25)], 30-day [OR 1.03, 95% CI (0.47 to 2.25)] or 90-day mortality [OR 1.08, 95% CI (0.53-2.24)].
CONCLUSIONS
No significant differences were detected in incidence of POD, nor in other delirium-related outcomes between NA and GA groups and in subgroup analyses. NA appeared to be associated with a shorter hospital stay, especially in patients without pre-existing dementia, but the observed effect did not reach statistical significance. Further larger prospective randomized trials investigating POD incidence and its duration and addressing long-term clinical outcomes are indicated to rule out important differences between different methods of anesthesia for hip surgery.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
10.17605/OSF.IO/3DJ6C.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Emergence Delirium; Incidence; Hip Fractures; Anesthesia, General; Dementia
PubMed: 37481517
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02196-9 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Dec 2023Many RCTs have evaluated the influence of intraoperative tidal volume (tV), PEEP, and driving pressure on the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Impact of ventilation strategies on pulmonary and cardiovascular complications in patients undergoing general anaesthesia for elective surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Many RCTs have evaluated the influence of intraoperative tidal volume (tV), PEEP, and driving pressure on the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications, cardiovascular complications, and mortality in adult patients. Our meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association between tV, PEEP, and driving pressure and the above-mentioned outcomes.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs from inception to May 19, 2022. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications; the secondary outcomes were intraoperative cardiovascular complications and 30-day mortality. Primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated stratifying patients in the following groups: (1) low tV (LV, tV 6-8 ml kg and PEEP ≥5 cm HO) vs high tV (HV, tV >8 ml kg and PEEP=0 cm HO); (2) higher PEEP (HP, ≥6 cm HO) vs lower PEEP (LP, <6 cm HO); and (3) driving pressure-guided PEEP (DP) vs fixed PEEP (FP).
RESULTS
We included 16 RCTs with a total sample size of 4993. The incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications was lower in patients treated with LV than with HV (OR=0.402, CI 0.280-0.577, P<0.001) and lower in DP than in FP group (OR=0.358, CI 0.187-0.684, P=0.002). Postoperative pulmonary complications did not differ between HP and LP groups; the incidence of intraoperative cardiovascular complications was higher in HP group (OR=1.385, CI 1.027-1.867, P=0.002). The 30-day mortality was not influenced by the ventilation strategy.
CONCLUSIONS
Optimal intraoperative mechanical ventilation is unclear; however, our meta-analysis showed that low tidal volume and driving pressure-guided PEEP strategies were associated with a reduction in postoperative pulmonary complications.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Respiration, Artificial; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Elective Surgical Procedures; Postoperative Complications; Tidal Volume; Anesthesia, General
PubMed: 37839932
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2023.09.011 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2023To compare the effects of intranasal dexmedetomidine (Dex) and oral midazolam in the preoperative medication of children by using a method of meta-analysis. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effects of intranasal dexmedetomidine (Dex) and oral midazolam in the preoperative medication of children by using a method of meta-analysis.
METHODS
Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to July 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intranasal Dex vs. oral midazolam in pediatric premedication were collected. Stata 15.0 statistical software was used to analyze the collected data. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect sizes.
RESULTS
A total of 11 studies with 824 children were included, containing 415 patients in the Dex group and 409 patients in the midazolam group. Compared with the oral midazolam group, the intranasal Dex group had a better preoperative sedation effect at parent-child separation (RR = 1.37, 95% CI: 1.14-1.64) and anesthesia induction (RR = 2.08, 95% CI: 1.03-4.22). In addition, there was no significant difference in the incidence of analgesia remedy (RR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.36-1.00) the acceptance of anesthesia masks (RR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.83-1.12), and incidence of adverse events between (RR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.06-1.13, = 0.072) between the intranasal Dex and oral midazolam groups.
CONCLUSION
Compared with oral midazolam, intranasal Dex has better sedative effects of parent-child separation and anesthesia induction in pediatric premedication, but there was no difference in the incidence of anesthesia remedy, anesthesia mask acceptance, and incidence of adverse events. Therefore, compared with oral midazolam, intranasal Dex is a better choice for premedication in children.
PubMed: 38027288
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2023.1264081 -
The Journal of Headache and Pain Sep 2023Novel disease-specific and mechanism-based treatments sharing good evidence of efficacy for migraine have been recently marketed. However, reimbursement by insurers... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Novel disease-specific and mechanism-based treatments sharing good evidence of efficacy for migraine have been recently marketed. However, reimbursement by insurers depends on treatment failure with classic anti-migraine drugs. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to identify and rate the evidence for efficacy of flunarizine, a repurposed, first- or second-line treatment for migraine prophylaxis.
METHODS
A systematic search in MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed for trials of pharmacological treatment in migraine prophylaxis, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA). Eligible trials for meta-analysis were randomized, placebo-controlled studies comparing flunarizine with placebo. Outcomes of interest according to the Outcome Set for preventive intervention trials in chronic and episodic migraine (COSMIG) were the proportion of patients reaching a 50% or more reduction in monthly migraine days, the change in monthly migraine days (MMDs), and Adverse Events (AEs) leading to discontinuation.
RESULTS
Five trials were eligible for narrative description and three for data synthesis and analysis. No studies reported the predefined outcomes, but one study assessed the 50% reduction in monthly migraine attacks with flunarizine as compared to placebo showing a benefit from flunarizine with a low or probably low risk of bias. We found that flunarizine may increase the proportion of patients who discontinue due to adverse events compared to placebo (risk difference: 0.02; 95% CI -0.03 to 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS
Published flunarizine trials predate the recommended endpoints for evaluating migraine prophylaxis drugs, hence the lack of an adequate assessment for these endpoints. Further, modern-day, large-scale studies would be valuable in re-evaluating the efficacy of flunarizine for the treatment of migraines, offering additional insights into its potential benefits.
Topics: Humans; Flunarizine; Headache; Migraine Disorders; Migraine with Aura; Research Design; Transcription Factors
PubMed: 37723437
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-023-01657-3 -
BMC Anesthesiology Jul 2023The number of non-intubated general anesthesia outside the operating room is growing as the increasing demand for comfort treatment. Non-intubated general anesthesia... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Analysis of the efficacy of subclinical doses of esketamine in combination with propofol in non-intubated general anesthesia procedures - a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
The number of non-intubated general anesthesia outside the operating room is growing as the increasing demand for comfort treatment. Non-intubated general anesthesia outside the operating room requires rapid onset of anesthesia, smoothness, quick recovery, and few postoperative complications. Traditional anesthetic regimens (propofol alone or propofol and opioids/dezocine/midazolam, etc.) have severe respiratory and circulatory depression and many systemic adverse effects. In this paper, we compare the effectiveness and safety of propofol and subclinical doses of esketamine with other traditional regimens applied to non-intubated general anesthesia through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and Sinomed databases for the period from January 2000 to October 2022. We rigorously screened the literature according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, while risk assessment of the studies was performed using The Cochrane Collaboration's tool, and statistical analysis of the data was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. The main outcome indicators we evaluated were the various hemodynamic parameters and incidence of various adverse effects between the experimental and control groups after induction of anesthesia.
RESULTS
After a rigorous screening process, a total of 14 papers were included in the final meta-analysis. After risk bias assessment, three of the papers were judged as low risk and the others were judged as having moderate to high risk. Forest plots were drawn for a total of 16 indicators. Meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in HR' WMD 3.27 (0.66, 5.87), MAP' WMD 9.68 (6.13, 13.24), SBP' WMD 5.42 (2.11, 8.73), DBP' WMD 4.02 (1.15, 6.88), propofol dose' SMD -1.39 (-2.45, -0.33), hypotension' RR 0.30 (0.20, 0.45), bradycardia' RR 0.33 (0.14, 0.77), hypoxemia or apnea' RR 0.45 (0.23, 0.89), injection pain' RR 0.28 (0.13, 0.60), intraoperative choking' RR 0.62 (0.50, 0.77), intraoperative body movements' RR 0.48 (0.29, 0.81) and overall incidence of adverse reactions' RR 0.52 (0.39, 0.70).The indicators that were not statistically different were time to wake up' WMD - 0.55 (-1.29, 0.19), nausea and vomiting 0.84' RR (0.43, 1.67), headache and dizziness' RR 1.57 (0.98, 2.50) and neuropsychiatric reaction' RR 1.05 (0.28, 3.93). The funnel plot showed that the vast majority of studies fell within the funnel interval, but the symmetry was relatively poor.
CONCLUSION
In non-intubated general anesthesia, the combination of subclinical doses of esketamine and propofol did reduce circulatory and respiratory depression, injection pain, and other adverse effects, while the incidence of esketamine's own side effects such as neuropsychiatric reactions did not increase, and the combination of the two did not cause the occurrence of new and more serious adverse reactions, and the combination of the two was safe and effective.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPREO registration number: CRD 42022368966.
Topics: Humans; Propofol; Ketamine; Anesthesia, General; Pain; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37479982
DOI: 10.1186/s12871-023-02135-8 -
Cureus Oct 2023Artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to improve healthcare outcomes by facilitating early diagnosis, reducing the medical administrative burden, aiding drug... (Review)
Review
Artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to improve healthcare outcomes by facilitating early diagnosis, reducing the medical administrative burden, aiding drug development, personalising medical and oncological management, monitoring healthcare parameters on an individual basis, and allowing clinicians to spend more time with their patients. In the post-pandemic world where there is a drive for efficient delivery of healthcare and manage long waiting times for patients to access care, AI has an important role in supporting clinicians and healthcare systems to streamline the care pathways and provide timely and high-quality care for the patients. Despite AI technologies being used in healthcare for some decades, and all the theoretical potential of AI, the uptake in healthcare has been uneven and slower than anticipated and there remain a number of barriers, both overt and covert, which have limited its incorporation. This literature review highlighted barriers in six key areas: ethical, technological, liability and regulatory, workforce, social, and patient safety barriers. Defining and understanding the barriers preventing the acceptance and implementation of AI in the setting of healthcare will enable clinical staff and healthcare leaders to overcome the identified hurdles and incorporate AI technologies for the benefit of patients and clinical staff.
PubMed: 37927664
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.46454 -
European Journal of Physical and... Aug 2023Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is the most common spinal deformity encountered in adolescents and larger curves are more prevalent in girls. For females with scoliosis,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is the most common spinal deformity encountered in adolescents and larger curves are more prevalent in girls. For females with scoliosis, women's health issues are of particular concern, especially pregnancy. The aim of this review was to summarise the best available evidence to determine the influence of pregnancy on scoliosis-related outcomes in women with scoliosis and whether scoliosis affects maternal-health outcomes, differentiating between patients who have been managed conservatively and/or surgically.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A search was conducted using CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane Database, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to May 2023 to identify relevant articles in any language. The scoping review followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Studies were eligible if they included pregnant women (primiparous or multiparous) with a diagnosis of scoliosis of unknown aetiology. The results were summarized by outcomes, including pregnancy and scoliosis-related outcomes and type of management.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Our comprehensive search strategy identified 6872 articles, of which 50 articles were eligible for this review. Back pain appears to be more prevalent in this population during pregnancy and associated with the major curve and the decrease of lumbar lordosis. There have been reports of failed attempted spinal anaesthesia among patients with instrumented scoliosis correction and minor complications related to epidural anaesthesia at a higher rate compared to non-instrumented patients and healthy controls, however successful spinal analgesia can be achieved in patients with instrumented scoliosis correction. Overall, the caesarean section rate was similar in scoliosis patients compared to controls without scoliosis and to national averages. Curve progression occurs in some but not all patients during pregnancy, and this phenomenon occurs irrespective of the treatment received.
CONCLUSIONS
Higher-quality prospective longitudinal research is needed to understand the relationship between pregnancy and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Further, the patient's perspective, concerns and fears surrounding pregnancy with scoliosis are yet to be explored. Exploring the impact of pregnancy on women with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis would have clinically relevant outcomes and could help provide pertinent answers to patients and healthcare workers and help guide future research.
Topics: Pregnancy; Animals; Adolescent; Female; Humans; Scoliosis; Cesarean Section; Prospective Studies; Databases, Factual; Fear
PubMed: 37746783
DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.23.08086-3 -
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2023The pharmacological treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is unsatisfactory, and there is a clinical need for new approaches. Several drugs under advanced clinical...
The pharmacological treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is unsatisfactory, and there is a clinical need for new approaches. Several drugs under advanced clinical development are addressed in this review. A systematic literature search was conducted in three electronic databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus) and in the ClinicalTrials.gov register from 1 January 2016 to 1 June 2023 to identify Phase II, III and IV clinical trials evaluating drugs for the treatment of PHN. A total of 18 clinical trials were selected evaluating 15 molecules with pharmacological actions on nine different molecular targets: Angiotensin Type 2 Receptor (AT2R) antagonism (olodanrigan), Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) α2δ subunit inhibition (crisugabalin, mirogabalin and pregabalin), Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel (VGSC) blockade (funapide and lidocaine), Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibition (TRK-700), Adaptor-Associated Kinase 1 (AAK1) inhibition (LX9211), Lanthionine Synthetase C-Like Protein (LANCL) activation (LAT8881), N-Methyl-D-Aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonism (esketamine), mu opioid receptor agonism (tramadol, oxycodone and hydromorphone) and Nerve Growth Factor (NGF) inhibition (fulranumab). In brief, there are several drugs in advanced clinical development for treating PHN with some of them reporting promising results. AT2R antagonism, AAK1 inhibition, LANCL activation and NGF inhibition are considered first-in-class analgesics. Hopefully, these trials will result in a better clinical management of PHN.
Topics: Humans; Drugs, Investigational; Nerve Growth Factor; Neuralgia, Postherpetic; Pregabalin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37629168
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241612987